> Hello Jen
>
> On 20-Dec-02, you wrote:
>
> > In Need New Close Friends, 19 Female Looking
> >
> > Hay I am Jen I am 19 and Like meeting new people from deffernt

walks

> > of Life.
> > I like meet people who like been sweet to me and care for me but
> > most of all Love try all types of sex, well I try anything once
> > Hoping to meet some nice open mined people from all ages and both
> > male and females.
> >
> > If you want to see my pics and Get my contact details please go to
> > my home page http://www.dcompany.net/jenshomepage
>
> Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the wrong

list

> (I think :-)).
>
> Regards
> --
> Mike Leavitt ac998@l...

LOL What timing, Mike. I just deleted Ms. Jen's post as you
responded. BTW, deleting posts is generally against our policy, so I
hope the other moderators don't mind that I took exception to this
one, which I personally found offensive. Then again, some of those
ancient heresiologists might have figured a licentious female would
fit right in a Gnostic setting. Eeeek. ;-)

Cari

Terje Dahl Bergersen

... It´s a reading , interpretation - in terms of the Carpocratians, Ireneaus mentions, probably as among the first, secret handshakes - by which the

LOL What timing, Mike. I just deleted Ms. Jen's post as
you
responded. BTW, deleting posts is generally against our policy,
so I
hope the other moderators don't mind that I took exception to this
one, which I personally found offensive. Then again, some of
those
ancient heresiologists might have figured a licentious female
would

fit right in a Gnostic setting.
Eeeek. ;-)

It´s a "reading", interpretation - in terms
of the Carpocratians,

Ireneaus mentions, probably as among the first, secret
handshakes -

by which the initiates of the school would recognize
eachother without

letting others know, nor uttering a word which would betray
their

affiliation; Ireneaus is brief about what is involved, but
states

that it is "a tickling of the palm with the
finger".

What is amazing, however, is that this is associated with
licentious

behaviour, since the Early underground (pre-Ireneaus) church
would

inwardly identify eachother by drawing the contures of a fish
in

the palm of eachother´s hand. Like Ireneaus did not know
that the

Gospels describes Jesus as not having been crucified at
the

age of 50, Ireneaus does not honestly know how the
earliest communities,

even in his vicinity, the Gaul area, identified eachother
towards

eachother.

In view of recent spamming, you should know that some of the
attacks

isn´t incidental and entirely innocent - there exists
strong policies

against posting "adult" content on "family"
forums, moreover, the

important thing for those who enforce this policy is that if
it is

discovered, the editors and the forum itself, not the poster,
is

responsible. What am I trying to say - one thing is the noise
of

offtopic postings growing in greater volume than actual
on-topic

discussion posts, another thing is the violation of service
regulations

done purposedly to make the providers close the
service.

"Jen" does not exist, she is a commercial product,
a pseudo-identity

which is used for the precise reason that our
"true", or manifest

personalities are shrouded in mystery through our
communication on

the internet. I suppose those who invented Jen and put her to
work

on this forum wants everyone to go look at "her"
homepage, and thus

solicit interest in their "product". There´s
something marvelously

Archontic about these things. The peddling of dreams and
desires

which is associated, not with self nor with soul, but with a
construct -

is among the oldest tricks in the book.

I´d like to mention that I received the post, since I read
the posts

on this forum by email.

I remember being a bit paranoid about the
site-takeover/hijack which

occured this summer of the Ecclesia Gnostica Norvegia
website

bruchion.com - it turned out that suddenly the content of our
website

were replaced by Brasilian pornography.. at that time I
thought mine

about it, turned out the service provider were neglectful and
had

sold the domain name twice.. however, who would associate the
Alexandrian

Bruchion with wanton south-american lesbians who just would
love to

show it all to you?

I were reminded that some Anti-Masons with a
certain

intelligence concerning how such things could be perceived,
and some

tech-savvy accomplices - systematically hacked, removed and
replaced

Masonic and masons websites, replacing them with commercial
porn sites,

having done so, they reported the supposed owners of those
sites

to the authorities and "leaked" the news that
Masons made money on

pornography on the Internet... It had the effect they wanted,
for about

two weeks when this was found out.

A further note on license, I am not sure about laws, but I
know

America has a sex industry which isn´t entirely satisfied
by

operating in the shadows and in discreet facilities - in
view

of the founding fathers and their puritan legacy, one might
ask if the

license which is in fact in function, is the sacred symbol of
the Dollar.

Intimacy turned into a product remains a product and not true
intimacy,

today, relationships are grafted by way of a promise of profit,
which

sinks ships along the way, because such profit is never worth
the

sacrifice. Not only the fundamentalists are turning both
insensitive and

hypocritical, all hues and variations of human beings, in our
mass-culture,

has caught it as well.

Just a little bit of a rant

(Happy Saint Thomas the Apostle´s day, by the way)

Pax Pleromae

Terje Dahl Bergersen

terje@...

http://terje.bergersen.net

lady_caritas

... the ... Dollar. ... intimacy, ... which ... insensitive and ... culture, ... Rant all you want, Terje. My rant took the form of obliterating the post.

> A further note on license, I am not sure about laws, but I know
> America has a sex industry which isn´t entirely satisfied by
> operating in the shadows and in discreet facilities - in view
> of the founding fathers and their puritan legacy, one might ask if

the

> license which is in fact in function, is the sacred symbol of the

Dollar.

> Intimacy turned into a product remains a product and not true

intimacy,

> today, relationships are grafted by way of a promise of profit,

which

> sinks ships along the way, because such profit is never worth the
> sacrifice. Not only the fundamentalists are turning both

insensitive and

> hypocritical, all hues and variations of human beings, in our mass-

culture,

> has caught it as well.
>
> Just a little bit of a rant
>
> (Happy Saint Thomas the Apostle´s day, by the way)

Rant all you want, Terje. My rant took the form of obliterating the
post. LOL It had occurred to me that this type of spam, unusual for
our forum, was not entirely incidental.

And, thanks for the greeting, Terje.

As you say, the sex industry is taking advantage of a puritanical
mindset that focuses on the material. There indeed appears to be an
archontic profit motivation from a product designed to titillate
those who perceive the body to be "forbidden" and "shameful." And I
agree that true human intimacy is denigrated in the process.

Interesting that the Gospel of Thomas has some symbolic words to this
effect, regarding the importance of our attitudes about the physical
in order to perceive again as "children":

"His disciples said, `When will you be shown forth to us and when
shall we behold you?' Jesus said, `When you strip naked without
being ashamed, and take your garments and put them under your feet
like little children and tread upon them, then [you] will see the
child of the living. And you will not be afraid.'" (Logion 37)

He also says,

" Wretched is the body that depends upon a body. And wretched is
the soul that depends upon these two." (Logion 87)

"Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth; for
ye are dead to earth, and your life is hid with Christ in God."

Cari

Mike Leavitt

Hello Terje ... God bless you Terje, you are the only one who could turn a porno spam into a two screen rant, plus HTML, which you should have cut. Anyway I

Message 4 of 10
, Dec 21, 2002

0 Attachment

Hello Terje

On 21-Dec-02, you wrote:

>>
>>> Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the
>> wrong list
>>> (I think :-)).
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> --
>>> Mike Leavitt ac998@l...
>>
>>
>> LOL What timing, Mike. I just deleted Ms. Jen's post as you
>> responded. BTW, deleting posts is generally against our policy, so
>> I hope the other moderators don't mind that I took exception to
>> this one, which I personally found offensive. Then again, some of
>> those ancient heresiologists might have figured a licentious female
>> would fit right in a Gnostic setting. Eeeek. ;-)
>
> It´s a "reading", interpretation - in terms of the Carpocratians,
> Ireneaus mentions, probably as among the first, secret handshakes -
> by which the initiates of the school would recognize eachother
> without letting others know, nor uttering a word which would betray
> their affiliation; Ireneaus is brief about what is involved, but
> states that it is "a tickling of the palm with the finger". What is
> amazing, however, is that this is associated with licentious
> behaviour, since the Early underground (pre-Ireneaus) church would
> inwardly identify eachother by drawing the contures of a fish in the
> palm of eachother´s hand. Like Ireneaus did not know that the
> Gospels describes Jesus as not having been crucified at the age of
> 50, Ireneaus does not honestly know how the earliest communities,
> even in his vicinity, the Gaul area, identified eachother towards
> eachother.
>
> In view of recent spamming, you should know that some of the attacks
> isn´t incidental and entirely innocent - there exists strong
> policies against posting "adult" content on "family" forums,
> moreover, the important thing for those who enforce this policy is
> that if it is discovered, the editors and the forum itself, not the
> poster, is responsible. What am I trying to say - one thing is the
> noise of offtopic postings growing in greater volume than actual
> on-topic discussion posts, another thing is the violation of service
> regulations done purposedly to make the providers close the service.
> "Jen" does not exist, she is a commercial product, a pseudo-identity
> which is used for the precise reason that our "true", or manifest
> personalities are shrouded in mystery through our communication on
> the internet. I suppose those who invented Jen and put her to work
> on this forum wants everyone to go look at "her" homepage, and thus
> solicit interest in their "product". There´s something marvelously
> Archontic about these things. The peddling of dreams and desires
> which is associated, not with self nor with soul, but with a
> construct - is among the oldest tricks in the book. I´d like to
> mention that I received the post, since I read the posts on this
> forum by email.
>
> I remember being a bit paranoid about the site-takeover/hijack which
> occured this summer of the Ecclesia Gnostica Norvegia website
> bruchion.com - it turned out that suddenly the content of our
> website were replaced by Brasilian pornography.. at that time I
> thought mine about it, turned out the service provider were
> neglectful and had sold the domain name twice.. however, who would
> associate the Alexandrian Bruchion with wanton south-american
> lesbians who just would love to show it all to you?
>
>
> I were reminded that some Anti-Masons with a certain intelligence
> concerning how such things could be perceived, and some tech-savvy
> accomplices - systematically hacked, removed and replaced Masonic
> and masons websites, replacing them with commercial porn sites,
> having done so, they reported the supposed owners of those sites to
> the authorities and "leaked" the news that Masons made money on
> pornography on the Internet... It had the effect they wanted, for
> about two weeks when this was found out.
>
> A further note on license, I am not sure about laws, but I know
> America has a sex industry which isn´t entirely satisfied by
> operating in the shadows and in discreet facilities - in view of the
> founding fathers and their puritan legacy, one might ask if the
> license which is in fact in function, is the sacred symbol of the
> Dollar. Intimacy turned into a product remains a product and not
> true intimacy, today, relationships are grafted by way of a promise
> of profit, which sinks ships along the way, because such profit is
> never worth the sacrifice. Not only the fundamentalists are turning
> both insensitive and hypocritical, all hues and variations of human
> beings, in our mass-culture, has caught it as well.
>
> Just a little bit of a rant
>
> (Happy Saint Thomas the Apostle´s day, by the way)
>
> Pax Pleromae
>
> Terje Dahl Bergersen
> terje@...
> http://terje.bergersen.net

God bless you Terje, you are the only one who could turn a porno spam
into a two screen rant, plus HTML, which you should have cut. Anyway
I remember what happened to Bruncion, and it was not funny. I knew
it was spam to the list, and almost deleted it from the server, but
could not believe what it was. The thing on Carpocrates was worth
the two screens though. HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL picked up on
Ireneaus' thing about Jesus being 50 when he died, and it may have
been an alternate early tradition, BTW. Like you, though, I think it
was his spotty background in Christianity.

> --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Mike Leavitt <ac998@l...>
> wrote:
>> Hello Jen
>
>>> Hoping to meet some nice open mined people
>
> Um - no comment.
>
>
>> Looks like Corax's filters are down. :-) Boy is she in the wrong
> list
>> (I think :-)).
>>
>> Regards
>> --
>> Mike Leavitt ac998@l...
>
> Hello Mike:
>
> I havent been reading this list in a while since it has been very
> quiet - as most seem to be.
>
> I agree with Terje that attcks seem to be de rigeur on gnostic
> groups, but I would not blame antimasonics right off the bat,
> there are some thelemites who have done a fine job of infiltrating
> and sabotauging gnostics lists as well over the past 2 years.
>
> Corax

I havent been reading this list in a while since it has been very
quiet - as most seem to be.

I agree with Terje that attcks seem to be de rigeur on gnostic
groups, but I would not blame antimasonics right off the bat,
there are some thelemites who have done a fine job of infiltrating
and sabotauging gnostics lists as well over the past 2 years.

Corax

hesperos19 <coraxo@elp.rr.com>

... ones. ... Yes who is to know really who among whom are the dangerous ones. I really know very little of the antimasonics that Terje was referring to nor do

I really know very little of the antimasonics that Terje was
referring to nor do I intend to omplicate "all" thelemites in such
activity - I know that one account of mine was hacked by
malaysian islamic fundamentalists which I am currently involved
with Verisign to get taken down - with no small amount of
difficulty.

Verisign, just so you and others know, is pretty soft on such
hacking and one has to go through a number of hoops to get
such things resolved.

I would not register a domain or use Verisgn for secure
transactions precisely because they are not as secure as they
purport to be.

Off gnostic topic but just a word to the wise regarding such
recent computer crimes.

It also seems to me that what Terje was referring to about the
number of topic posts being on increase on a list seems to have
been the case around the time I stopped reading this list.

While there may not be a concerted conspiracy, or maybe here
is, it is clear that there are a number of occult and reactionary
groups that have a vested interest in suppressing gnosticism
through spam, porn, and disinformation campaigns.

Nevetheless, I have turned my emails back on for this group in
hopes that there may be some fruitful discussion after the last
spate of non-gnostic stuff.
Corax

Corax

hesperos19 <coraxo@elp.rr.com>

... wrote: Like Ireneaus did not know that the Gospels describes Jesus as not having been crucified at the age of 50, Ireneaus does not honestly

Message 8 of 10
, Dec 22, 2002

0 Attachment

--- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, Terje Dahl Bergersen
<terje@b...> wrote:
Like Ireneaus did not know that the
Gospels describes Jesus as not having been crucified at the
age of 50, Ireneaus does not honestly know how the earliest
communities,
even in his vicinity, the Gaul area, identified eachother towards
eachother.

++++++++

Salve Terje:

Unlike many other modern gnostics I tend to have a bit of
forgiveness towards Irenaeus, since of course much of what is
to blame later results from later interpretations of Irenaeus.

Like the 50 year old Jesus tradition he espouses, he also
espouses doctrines which are contrary to Paul, so not only was
he unfamiliar with the gospels - if any had trul been written at his
time of what the Cgurch now holds as canonical - but he also
demonstrates a lack of familiarity with Paul -

Book V

2. But vain in every respect are they who despise the entire
dispensation of God, and disallow the salvation of the flesh, and
treat with contempt its regeneration, maintaining that it is not
capable of incorruption.

contrast with Paul:

1Co 15:50 -
Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the
kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the
imperishable.

But he is going by the traditions he was taught mouth to ear.

the concept of sola scriptura however is a falsity since of course
as gnostics we recognize a number of extracanonical writings as
well as the power of apostoloc tradition - after all the canon was
agreed upon by the ecumenical councils.

Irenaeus, despite his railings against Valentinus does make
other very beautiful points which i am not entirely willing to
disregard - after all, other than the Gnostics a number of other
positions were decided against; monarchism, modalism,
donatism etc, etc, all of which have compelling arguments in
their favor - the monophysite being one such.

Unlike the impudently sarcastic and cynical tertullian, I think
Irenaeus was sincere in his criticisms of Valentinus. Elsewhere
Irenaeus called for tolerance of Montanists - so how closed and
dogmatic was he really?

At any rate, i do not think Irenaeus is as black as those would try
to paint him and in many ways I find him less sinister than
tertullian or Hippolyte.

Corax

hesperos19 <coraxo@elp.rr.com>

... Paul - ... and ... I really should have said - understanding rather than familiarity because poor Ireanaeus goes through all sorts of hoops in Book V to

> time of what the Cgurch now holds as canonical - but he also
> demonstrates a lack of *familiarity* (read understanding) with

Paul -

>
> Book V
>
> 2. But vain in every respect are they who despise the entire
> dispensation of God, and disallow the salvation of the flesh,

and

> treat with contempt its regeneration, maintaining that it is not
> capable of incorruption.
>
> contrast with Paul:
>
> 1Co 15:50 -
> Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the
> kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the
> imperishable.
>
> But he is going by the traditions he was taught mouth to ear.

I really should have said - understanding rather than familiarity
because poor Ireanaeus goes through all sorts of hoops in Book
V to argue for the eternal physis of the Flesh using paul as
source - my error.

Corax, heretic

Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.